SEC: Efficiency II

OK, when I meant efficiency, as part of safety and comfort in transportation, I meant efficiency in government spending.

Again, efficiency means what we get for what we spend.

Thus, cycling is energy efficient.

However, I feel that when done right, it’s also government spending efficient.

This is because cycling infrastructure costs much less than what would be done by motoring. It’s only when the two costs are combined which assumes that we’ll all ride bicycles AND drive everywhere at the same time does the spending look a bit high.

Still, spending on motoring is higher and thus, we should question whether we do it at all in some places. Of course, we’ll need to build fire roads, but smaller fire trucks, are also more cost efficient so we should scale back for this.

I suggest mandating that a complete network for cycling and walking be put into place first then have the roads work around that. With these modes prioritized, we should see a cost savings of at least ten times.

That money can go back as a tax break.

Furthermore, I feel that if we have separate cycling infrastructure, cycling would take less time. Plus, if we had the freeway grade of only a few percent, there would be no hills and cycling would be even faster and easier. Again, this is far less than the freeway system and would literally cost pennies on the dollar.

It’s not that I don’t want the motoring stuff to be built, I just feel that motorists have not made a case for each and every road, but rather they are built automatically as a given while those who walk and cycle are forced to walk around them and to beg for money that should have been spent on them from the beginning if the politicians and government really cared about saving money at all.

Finally, places where bicycles are popular are packed with people while places where motoring is preferred, you can hardly find anyone around. Plus there’s the wasted space for the parking lots and freeways where we could have been building businesses and homes which could be taxed instead of the permanent government liability we have in maintaining the roads.

Also, I’d argue that any safety improvements such as guard rails should work in the favor of all modes rather than just make motoring safer. Otherwise, people will just drive faster and get into the same number of collisions, but cycling and walking will be less safe.

Finally, separate infrastructure for each mode will ensure the least number of collisions and when there are collisions they will be less harmful especially for the non-motorized users.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: